College basketball remains the best game around, and all of the early defections to the NBA have not changed that. I doubt that it ever will. Sure, the game is different now, but it is still great, and it is still the best, most passionate game on the American landscape.
Why is it the best game? It has unrivaled tradition, and marvelous rivalries that shake you to your core every season. There are new stars every season, and we get to watch them mature at a time of growth in their lives and careers. There are different styles, such as Temple's zone and ball-control offense or Florida's up-tempo pressure and 3-point arsenal. And the game never allows you to be sure of the outcome because there are so many ways to do it and do it right.
The college game is unrestricted by artificial rules, such as the illegal defense of the NBA. There are legends, old and young coaches, and the most exciting games throughout the season. The game is the perfect length, and teams play just enough of them. Unlike other sports, every game counts, and there is no reason to run up the score to satisfy a computer. And then comes the NCAA Tournament, the best and most exciting postseason in all of sports.
|  | | The college game may not have Kwame Brown, but it does have plenty of superstars in the making. |
You get one shot in the NCAA Tournament, and the best team does not always win the national title. In fact, more often than not, the best team does not win, which means college basketball observers get to crown a legitimate champion without argument, and still argue over which was the best team. And, when the best team is able to walk the tightrope and win it all, it's a beautiful thing.
Now that I've lauded college basketball, let me also say it could use some tweaking. There are some trends that are cause for concern but not alarm, and some canaries in the coal mine that are not being heeded. Here are just a few of my concerns as we head into the 2002 season.
Kwame Brown didn't make a mistake by coming out of high school directly into the NBA. However, it is not true that "he had no choice" but to declare for the draft because he would be a lottery pick. Simply because Kobe Bryant and Kevin Garnett made it does not make it the right decision for every kid. Similarly, because Tiger Woods and Bill Gates left school early, it does not mean that it is the right move for everyone.
Woods and Gates differed from Bryant and Garnett in that Woods and Gates were prepared to make an immediate impact. Woods left Stanford to win golf tournaments and play top-level golf, while Gates left Harvard to develop and market a new vision for an entire industry. Almost without exception, the players leaving high school and college before age 20 are entering the NBA knowing they are not prepared to play, they are only prepared to be drafted and to make money, expecting to mature and improve in the future.
Is that so wrong? No, not in every case. But there are fewer success stories than failures, and too many young players are fooled into thinking they are prepared, when in fact, they are not.
What is to blame? The NBA rookie salary structure, guaranteed contracts for all first-round picks, agents, dubious advisors and a culture in which kids are growing up watching other kids get drafted out of high school have thrown things out of whack. Here's what needs to happen.
The NBA needs to scrap the Rookie Salary Cap and tear down the current system that encourages under-prepared players to declare for the draft without regard to where they are drafted. The only distinction of importance to kids coming out is "first round," which means three years plus an option year of guaranteed money. Until the NBA alters its current salary structure for rookies, kids will continue to come out, prepared or not.
The NCAA needs to take the lead in its own future. The NBA will not put in an age limit, will not change the salary structure, and will not tie years in school to free agency. Therefore, the NCAA needs to be proactive to preserve itself and its viability.
For those who cannot imagine a world without the NCAA, remember that the AAU was once the most powerful amateur sports organization in the nation, and is now home to some hoop tournaments and swim meets. The NCAA needs to get rid of its antiquated notion of amateurism. The NCAA should allow players to come back to college if they declare and are undrafted, drafted but unhappy with their draft position, or if they fail on the professional level and wish to return to school within five or six years of the graduation of their high school class. Since the NBA won't do the right thing, let the NBA react to the NCAA's moves.
The NCAA should also let go of this notion that a player is corrupted if a benefit is received prior to being corrupted by the NCAA's benefits. The farce of suspensions two years ago of JaRon Rush, Erick Barkley and Andre Williams, and the upcoming farce having to do with foreign players and extra benefits, do not advance the best interests of the game. To the contrary, it hurts the game.
|
Summer Sizzlers
|
|
Here are Jay Bilas' top players to watch heading into the 2001-02 season:
BACKCOURT
Jason Williams, Duke
Kareem Rush, Missouri
Casey Jacobsen, Stanford
Frank Williams, Illinois
Juan Dixon, Maryland
FRONTCOURT
Reggie Evans, Iowa
Chris Marcus, W. Kentucky
Tayshaun Prince, Kentucky
Caron Butler, UConn
Lonny Baxter, Maryland
NEWCOMERS
Dajuan Wagner, Memphis
Kevin Torbert, Michigan State
David Lee, Florida
Jawad Williams, North Carolina
Julian Sensley, California
T.J. Ford, Texas
Rick Rickert, Minnesota
Josh Childress, Stanford
Julius Hodge, N.C. State
Cedric Bozeman, UCLA
|
The idea that a kid who plays club ball in Europe is a pro, when that is their system, and Chris Weinke and Trajan Langdon can play pro baseball and still maintain eligibility is an absurdity. In addition, let kids take advantage of their status to earn money while in school by working at camps and accepting speaking engagements to be a positive influence on kids. The money could be held in trust over a certain amount until graduation. It wouldn't cost member institutions anything and would actually make sense.
The NCAA needs to get ahead of the curve and stop trying to react to the actions of others. The Olympics have changed old standards to get into the 21st century, and so can the NCAA. I am now off of my soapbox.
Also, beware of the trendy statement that "college isn't for everyone." College is for everyone. We should encourage all toward higher education, and toward a lifetime of learning. Kids should be lauded for going to college, not pacified in avoidance of school to ply a trade as an uneducated person. Such notions are elitist at best, and racist at worst. Since when do we acquiesce to a young person's impulse to take the easy way out?
College is for everyone, but not every college is for every student. Individual decisions on admissions of athletes, as long as not made based upon an improper reason, are the business of each particular institution and no one else. "Unscrupulous coaches" have no power to admit a student into a college or university, admissions departments do. Athletic departments are not pulling universities in tow. They are acting like their universities, and reacting to the pressures placed upon them by their universities.
The notion that college is not for everyone is a dangerous one. If a kid gives up on the notion of college, he will soon fail to recognize the importance of high school. If a kid is not going to college, why work hard in high school? If a kid really wants to go pro, why not shirk school, fail to qualify for college and then claim that he has no choice but to turn pro or play in the developmental league?
Even if an early entry is wildly successful on the court, and banks more money than he can count, he should be encouraged to go to school to be a serious person and to lead a more meaningful and productive life. The importance of college should not be diminished in such a cavalier way.
I am really now off of my soapbox. Time to get back to what to look forward to happening on the court.
Will Duke repeat?
Duke was a preseason favorite in 2001, along with Arizona and Maryland, and delivered on Mike Krzyzewski's promise to "contend" for the national title. Duke was a favorite because of magazine coverboy Shane Battier and the explosive talent of Jason Williams, if he could harness his abilities. Remember the questions about Williams' turnovers and alleged wildness? Williams proved to be the best guard, and arguably the best player, in the nation.
It's easy to say that Duke won't repeat in 2002 because a repeat is so rare. It's a lot easier to be right saying that Duke won't do it.Without Battier, Duke will have significant holes to fill, namely his leadership, defense and perimeter shooting. With Battier, Duke played a different game in 2001, launching over 1,000 3-point shots, yet still marching to the free throw line over 1,000 times.
Duke either shot it over the top or drove it, keeping defenses off balance and reeling from raining 3s and charity tosses. Get ready for more of the same in 2002, as Duke will continue to spread the floor and attack with controlled abandon.
Entering 2002, Krzyzewski has more quickness and as many skilled perimeter players, and can surround Carlos Boozer inside with numerous accomplished handlers, passers and shooters. Williams, Chris Duhon, Mike Dunleavy and Dahntay Jones can all put the ball on the floor and attack off the dribble, and with the exception of Jones, all are outstanding outside shooters. Jones has improved his perimeter shooting and can keep defenders honest, but his greatest strength is taking the ball to the basket and defending.
Duke can repeat because the Blue Devils force opponents to change the way they play, buck traditional notions of balance, and attack on both ends for 40 minutes.
Still, history says that Duke will have great difficulty in repeating, and much is made of the struggle to win two in a row. It is very difficult, but it is not at all impossible.
In the 1950s, San Francisco nearly three-peated, and California nearly repeated under Pete Newell. In the early 1960s, Cincinnati repeated, and nearly three-peated, keeping Ohio State from a near three-peat. UCLA dominated the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s, and as the Bruins' stranglehold on the trophy was ending, Bob Knight's Indiana Hoosiers lost only one game over a two-year period and came within a Scott May injury from a repeat. In the 1980s, Georgetown was within a Villanova miracle from a repeat.
But the 1990s have seen the most opportunities to repeat of any decade since UCLA's dominance. UNLV was unbeaten and a near lock to repeat in 1991, before falling to an overmatched Duke team in the national semifinals when Greg Anthony fouled out on a questionable call and Stacey Augmon had his worst game as a Rebel. If UNLV repeats, obviously, Duke would not have. Arkansas lost to UCLA in the 1995 championship game, almost repeating right after Duke did. With national championships in 1996 and 1998, Kentucky was an overtime period away against Arizona from a three-peat with three very different teams, and two different coaches. Michigan State won in 2000 and reached the Final Four in 2001, with a credible chance of the vaunted repeat.
But, no matter how close a team comes to repeating, if it is not accomplished, the near miss is just a footnote to the masses. However, the larger lesson is that a repeat surely can happen, and Duke has all of the pieces to make it happen in 2002.
Final stop: Atlanta?
Duke isn't the only team with the ability to win a national championship in 2002. But, in order to beat Duke and win it all in Atlanta, a team can't make it all about Duke. The goal is not to beat Duke, but to win the national title. However, if Duke is standing in your way, it is not enough to throw all you can defensively at the Blue Devils.
Simply trying to get out to Duke's shooters with a hand up will not slow Duke's offense enough to win consistently. Challengers have to score effectively by spreading the floor, putting the ball to the deck and driving Duke, and rebounding the ball with ferocity on both ends. Rebounds and free throws can keep Duke from getting fitted for rings two years in a row, and can put a ring on your finger.
The following teams have the best chance to take the 2002 trophy in Atlanta:
Maryland: Maryland crashed the 2001 Final Four for the first time in school history, and has the chops to make it back again. Losing Terence Morris will be difficult, for as much as people liked to talk about his demeanor, Morris could score, rebound and block shots. No guard in the country is tougher than Juan Dixon, and no team in the country has played Duke any tougher. If the Terps can avoid making it all about Duke, and just concentrate on the path in front of them, Gary Williams can hang a banner in Cole Field House.
Florida: With all of the injuries and adversity, Florida may just have learned how to win in 2001. Billy Donovan and his staff did it with mirrors, and convinced the Gators they could play the same way with few substitutes. With some disguise and camouflage, Donovan did a magnificent coaching job. Donovan has guards, athletes, shooters and an inside presence with Udonis Haslem. With fresh and healthy bodies, the Gators can make a run at the Final Four.
|  | | Tayshaun Prince's decision to return to Kentucky is a big reason the Wildcats are once again national championship contenders |
Kentucky: Losing Jason Parker hurts, but he could be back and ready to contribute by January. Parker was poised to become one of the top big men in the SEC, but his injury provides an opportunity for Marvin Stone, and it makes it easier for Jules Camara to take over. Who, including Parker, was going to keep Camara off of the floor? Tayshaun Prince and Keith Bogans are both SEC Player of the Year candidates, and if Cliff Hawkins can handle the point and newcomer Rashaad Carruth can shoot the ball with consistency, Kentucky will be poised for a title shot.
Illinois: Bill Self had the Illini within shouting distance of the Final Four in his first season, and could knock the door in this year. Illinois will have to get more consistent star performances from Frank Williams, a quantum leap from Brian Cook, and steady play from Robert Archibald to be a real contender. Illinois will defend and rebound, and if the Illini can score the ball consistently and get out in transition to score easy baskets, Atlanta will be a destination in March.
Kansas: The Jayhawks are experienced and talented, but are not overly athletic or deep. Roy Williams is able to give the illusion of great depth, but doesn't really have as deep a bench as he used to. What he does have is a solid backcourt, with a terrific point guard in Kirk Hinrich and a tough nut in Jeff Boschee. Freshman Aaron Miles can give Williams a three-guard attack, and Drew Gooden and Nick Collison are two of the best big men in the nation. Kansas won't win a team decathlon, but the Jayhawks know how to get good, high-percentage shots, and if they can keep from being spread and taken off the dribble, the Jayhawks can win a title.
2002: The Year of the Guard
The NBA grabs up more and more under-prepared college and high school big men every year. Perhaps because you can't teach height, or good judgment, and because nobody wants to leave potential on the table, there are fewer of the more traditional big men out there for college teams. The skyscrapers who can play at both ends are a dying breed on campus.
As a result, the game has evolved, and teams with quicker, more mobile frontcourt players are having greater success. There are still quality big guys out there that will have major impact on the college game, but the pool of guards this season is unusually deep.
Take a look at the short list of outstanding guards that will be suiting up at your local college or university this year: Jason Williams, Chris Duhon and Mike Dunleavy at Duke, Kareem Rush (Missouri), Dan Dickau (Gonzaga), Frank Williams and Cory Bradford at Illinois, Casey Jacobsen (Stanford), Kirk Hinrich and Jeff Boschee at Kansas, Jameer Nelson and Marvin O'Connor at St. Joseph's, Jason Gardner (Arizona), Troy Bell (Boston College), Luke Recker (Iowa), Altron Jackson (South Florida), Juan Dixon and Steve Blake at Maryland, Maurice Baker (Oklahoma State), Preston Shumpert (Syracuse), Keith Bogans (Kentucky), Tamar Slay (Marshall), Jason Kapono (UCLA), Marcus Taylor (Michigan State), Tito Maddox (Fresno State), John Linehan (Providence), Marquis Daniels (Auburn), Lynn Greer (Temple), Andre Barrett (Seton Hall), Dajuan Wagner (Memphis), Bernard Robinson (Michigan), Steve Logan (Cincinatti), Imari Sawyer (DePaul), Henry Domercant (Eastern Illinois) ... and there are more.
Undervalued coaches
Mark Few, Gonzaga: Few is one of the gems in coaching. He is unassuming and self-effacing, but is an offensive mastermind that knows the game and how to teach it. His players are well-schooled, and he makes the game fun for them to play. Few is a keeper.
Thad Matta, Xavier: Matta is smart, structured and his teams play their style better than anyone else. He is young and energetic, and he is a fast riser in a job that has proven a springboard for top quality coaches like Pete Gillen and Skip Prosser.
Bobby Lutz, Charlotte: Lutz is always prepared, and has a unique understanding of the game and how it should be played. He has done a masterful job with and without great talent, and has worked his way up the hard way. Like Mark Few, Lutz could not land a part in a movie as a big-time basketball coach, but that's what he is.
Tom Crean, Marquette: No coach in America works harder than Tom Crean. He is tough-minded, smart, loyal and has a will to win and to do things right every time. When he asks a player to work and show a hunger to win, he is not asking anything of him he has not already asked of himself. Crean will deliver at Marquette, and Marquette will have a tough time keeping him.
Pat Douglass, UC Irvine: Douglass, like Lutz, has come up in the ranks the hard way. He had a model program at Cal State Bakersfield, but never got the credit he deserved being so far under the national radar screen. Douglass then took a sinking program at Irivine that hadn't been good since Kevin Magee and Tod Murphy left, and made it into a Big West contender, with even some loose talk about an at-large berth. Douglass can coach.
Tim O'Shea, Ohio: O'Shea is a newcomer to the MAC, but will fit in well with its fine stable of coaches. O'Shea is a good teacher, and has a wonderful eye for talent. Under Al Skinner, O'Shea was instrumental in building the Rhode Island program by finding diamonds in the rough and polishing what others had overlooked. Skinner and O'Shea did the same thing at Boston College, turning a forgotten program around in the same manner.
Give 'em some ink
When All-America teams are voted upon, outstanding players are left off year after year, time after time. Here is a list of players that have been overlooked, deserve to get more attention, and could have big seasons. Opposing coaches know them, and just how good they are.
Ronald Dupree, LSU: What does this guy have to do to get invited to play on an All-Star or USA Basketball team? He led the SEC in rebounding, was second in scoring, and the guy can't get arrested. Dupree is an incredible athlete, a 6-foot-6 high wire act that has speed and quickness and is gaining a perimeter game to go with his ability to get to the rim.
|
Mid-Major Power
|
|
Here are five mid-major programs who Jay Bilas says should have major success in 2001-02:
Gonzaga
Butler
Kent State
Western Kentucky
Marshall
|
Lavell Blanchard, Michigan: Blanchard is athletic, polished and can rebound. He is a good shooter that has sacrificed his inside ability to float to the perimeter, but he can be Michigan's version of Bryant Stith. Blanchard could walk away with Big Ten Player of the Year honors this season.
Justin Reed, Mississippi: Reed is a savvy defender that can rebound on the offensive end, shoot with range, and he has all of the tools to be an outstanding all-around player in the SEC.
Nick Collison, Kansas: Collison is a junior version of Kevin McHale, and has almost every move in the book on the low block. He is skilled, savvy, and incredibly tough. In fact, underneath his farmboy exterior, Collison is mean (in a good way). Drew Gooden is a better athlete, but Collison may be the better college player.
Melvin Ely, Fresno State: Ely is a terrific athlete that can block shots, rebound as much as he wants to, and has an improving low post game. His willingness to do dirty work will determine just how good he can become. He has the tools to dominate in college.
Erwin Dudley, Alabama: Dudley proved that you don't have to launch the ball from outside the arc to be an effective scorer. He is efficient, strong and hungry, and Dudley will be expected to continue to be the best rebounder at Alabama since Antonio McDyess.
Roger Mason, Jr., Virginia: The Cavaliers have a team of overlooked players, including Travis Watson and Chris Williams. Mason is a versatile slasher that plays the physical game, can shoot it well, and can handle well enough to play back-up point. Mason is a complete wing guard that can score in bunches.
Maurice Baker, Oklahoma State: Baker is one of the best guard rebounders in the nation. He can go up into a crowd and come out with the ball. He is quick, and competes with great work ethic. Baker can take it off the bounce, change ends and push the ball upcourt quickly. He is a natural scorer with 3-point range and may be the best all-around guard in the Big 12.
Josh Howard, Wake Forest: Howard is a gap rebounder and an outstanding perimeter shotblocker that can send back jumpshot attempts. He is a solid defender that can post and run the floor in transition. He needs to work on his handle and his ability to hit his perimeter jumper, but Howard should flourish in Skip Prosser's up-tempo game.
Marcus Taylor, Michigan State: Taylor is a fundamentally sound throwback and can really shoot the ball. With a year under his belt, Taylor should be ready to take over under Tom Izzo, and his maturity and change of pace and direction ability will make him one of the best guards in the Big Ten.
Brian Brown, Ohio State: Brown gets it done with toughness, both mental and physical. He is versatile, defends well and has shown an improved shot. Brown is the type of player every college coach would love to have.
|
|
|
